Movie notes: ‘Piranha’ doesn’t suck! Amazing!

“Piranha 3D” cast member Riley Steele (right) helps co-star Kelly Brook get a leg up at the movie’s premiere Wednesday in L.A. Steele and Brook have an underwater love scene in the film, which received decent reviews despite not being screened in advance for critics.

The score may be skewed a bit by an absence of mainstream critics, but “Piranha 3D” earned an 81 on the Tomatometer despite debuting Friday without being screened in advance to prevent opening-day reviews, a practice studios resort to when they think their film really, uh, bites.

So tell me again: What were the folks at Dimension Films afraid of?

Yes, when you break down the numbers  44 reviews judged “fresh” to 10 “rotten”  it’s obvious the 81 score was padded by glowing reports from folks and sources you’ve never heard of. The vote among “Top Critics” (i.e., from mainstream publications) was a paltry 3-2 in favor.

Obviously, the studio’s no-show decision is responsible for this small sampling, which may also explain the film’s poor showing at the box office. “Piranha 3D” barely cracked the $10 million mark, which left it No. 6 on the weekend box-office Top 10, behind even “Vampires Suck” (more on it later) and “Lottery Ticket.” (It did finish ahead of “The Switch,” which proves that audiences are tired of turkey-baster comedies).

Things might have been different had there been opening-day reviews. For instance, one of the mainstream critics who LOVED “Piranha 3D” was Christy Lemire of the Associated Press, whose reviews have appeared in Weekender. She began her review thusly:

Mere words cannot describe how awesomely gnarly “Piranha 3D” is, how hugely entertaining, and how urgently you must get yourself to the theater to see it. Like, now.

This is not a joke, by the way. This movie is a complete blast. To borrow a phrase from the kind of B-horror flicks to which “Piranha 3D” is such a loving and effective homage: Run, don’t walk.

Like “Snakes on a Plane,” which came out in the dead of summer four years ago, “Piranha 3D” knows exactly what it is and does exactly what it should do. It’s about piranhas … in 3-D. Do you really need to know anything else?

Unfortunately, since critics got their first shot at “Piranha 3D” after midnight last Friday along with the rest of the horror lovers, her review wasn’t available until Friday afternoon. Had she been allowed to see the movie Tuesday night, her effusive praise would have appeared in Weekender (maybe as the lead review instead of “The Switch”) and in newspapers across the country on opening day.

Certainly it would have broadened the movie’s marketing approach. For a 3-D movie, it had a flat, 2-D sales pitch. Everything I saw (trailers, TV ads) suggested a no-nonsense. blood-soaked horror flick with none of the “Jaws”-inspired black comedy of the cheesy 1978 original.

And, to make matters worse, a big ad that was supposed to run in Weekender last Friday was pulled at the last minute. Add that to the no-show status, and it suggests a studio trying to cut its losses.

Maybe it’s because I’m from the bad-publicity-is-better-than-no-publicity school of thought, but I’ve never understood this strategy. Yes, most no-shows (horror/supernatural flicks, lowbrow comedies and Tyler Perry movies) are niche films aimed at folks whose minds are already made up. To me, that’s why you SHOULD show them, not why you shouldn’t. If the assumption is that the target audience is gonna show up anyway, it stands to reason that a screening might put a few extra curious butts in the seats. It certainly couldn’t hurt.

For proof, we have “Vampires Suck,” the “Twilight” spoof. Technically, it was a no-show, too  it opened last Wednesday, with the first screenings Tuesday night. Yet we had a review in Weekender, thanks to its midweek opening. Maybe it’s not a coincidence that it did better at the box-office, earning an estimated $12.2 million last weekend and $18.6 million in its five days of release.

And unlike “Piranha 3D,” it got terrible reviews. It has a whopping 5 score on the Tomatometer, with two positive reviews out of 38.

Yes, over the weekend some Aussie online critic turned in lukewarm praise that was judged to be a positive review, which raised its score from 3. Fortunately, this wasn’t enough to screw up its status as the year’s worst mainstream movie. Halfhearted praise from one more straggler might, though. I’m keeping my fingers crossed.